Re: Softirq priority inversion from "softirq: reduce latencies"

[David Miller]

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:14:36 +0100 (CET)

> On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Peter Hurley wrote:
>> Or flipping your argument on its head, why not just _always_ execute
>> softirq in ksoftirqd?
> 
> Which is what that change effectivley does. And that makes a lot of sense,
> because you get the softirq load under scheduler control and do not let the
> softirq run as a context stealing entity which is completely uncontrollable by
> the scheduler.

+1